Four defects found by running the repository's own checks and one more trial
against it.
ESLint rejected an unused `armSettings` import in intent-eval.js; the caller
supplies `armSettingsByName` already.
A timeout was lost whenever a later turn came back clean: `a || b ? c : false`
evaluates the condition first, so `timedOut` was recomputed from the new turn
instead of being kept.
Isolating each trial's config directory, to stop persisted sessions piling up
under the projects folder, puts the credentials out of reach. Every turn then
returns "Not logged in", and the harness graded that as a coverage-hole - an
auth failure recorded as a finding. Keep the real config directory and delete
only the session folders this run's work root created, and adopt lib.js's own
guards: a trial that is unauthenticated, or whose gated arm edited files with no
metrics line and no denial, stops the run instead of being recorded.
Record denials per turn as well as in total. The hook marks a file checked once
per session and --resume keeps one session id for the conversation, so a zero
after a non-zero is the latch rather than the gate staying quiet, and
silence-hole has to be read with that column in view.
Verified: a real trial authenticates, produces a graded silence-hole, and leaves
the projects directory at the same count it started with.
The existing harness cannot measure what it set out to measure. Every trap
hides its deciding fact in the repository, which agents reliably discover, and
trials run one-shot under "do not ask clarifying questions", so a fact-forcing
gate is evaluated with no user to answer it. Its scenarios also declare the
question the gate ought to raise, chosen by reading the gate's own taxonomy, so
the suite passes by construction and can never find a missing question.
Add a second runner that measures effectiveness instead of coverage:
- scenarios-intent/ keeps the deciding fact in intent.json, as a choice between
plausible conventions the repository cannot settle, so an agent that does not
ask can only guess and the ungated arm cannot sit at the ceiling.
- user-sim.js plays that user with a separate cheap model: it answers the
question in front of it, never volunteers, and reports which fact ids it
disclosed, so asking something and asking the deciding thing are told apart.
An unparseable judge is a recorded failure, not a silent stonewall.
- session.js runs multi-turn sessions joined by --session-id and --resume, and
tells every arm the user is reachable, so the comparison is symmetric and the
gate's contribution is whether it makes the agent ask the deciding question.
- coverage.js classifies each trial from behaviour alone into working, lucky, or
a follow-through, targeting, silence or coverage hole, and reports the
questions the gate actually raised rather than asserting declared ones.
- run-intent.js refuses minus-target, which needs targets these scenarios
deliberately lack, and checks every grader separates the start, the trap and
the reference before a session is billed.
A scenario counts as carrying no information only when nothing varies across
arms. Trap strength is reported separately: the ungated arm failing is what a
working trap looks like, so it must not make a scenario unusable.
montjeffrey